https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767793 SC held that respondent was not a consumer under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 due to lack of privity of contract with appellant. Appellant was not liable to pay full sale consideration of Rs.31,00,000/- as purported Tripartite Agreement did not establish such obligation. Appellant's liability was restricted to satisfying complainant's dues with bank, quantified at Rs.17,87,763/- and could not exceed Rs.23,40,000/-. NCDRC failed to properly condone 10-year delay in filing complaint, lacking sufficient cause and formal order with reasons. Appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Mar 2025 06:50:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767793 SC held that respondent was not a consumer under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 due to lack of privity of contract with appellant. Appellant was not liable to pay full sale consideration of Rs.31,00,000/- as purported Tripartite Agreement did not establish such obligation. Appellant's liability was restricted to satisfying complainant's dues with bank, quantified at Rs.17,87,763/- and could not exceed Rs.23,40,000/-. NCDRC failed to properly condone 10-year delay in filing complaint, lacking sufficient cause and formal order with reasons. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767793